Common models of the scientific method articulate the processes by which we hypothesize about the correlation between variables and then test those predictions to make incremental conclusions about the world around us. Implied in this process is the replication and extension of that knowledge to various contexts. As with other social sciences, published analyses have demonstrated that media and communication scholarship suffers from a lack of replication studies, often due to presumptions about the lack of reward or incentive for conducting this work—such as perceived difficulties securing support for and/or publishing these studies. This commentary will reflect on and reinforce arguments for the intentional and important role of replication studies in media and communication scholarship. The essay reflects on replication as a key to post-positivist approaches, and then highlights recent developments that center replication work as key to scientific progression.
{"title":"On the Continued Need for Replication in Media and Communication Research","authors":"Nicholas Bowman","doi":"10.17645/mac.7935","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.7935","url":null,"abstract":"Common models of the scientific method articulate the processes by which we hypothesize about the correlation between variables and then test those predictions to make incremental conclusions about the world around us. Implied in this process is the replication and extension of that knowledge to various contexts. As with other social sciences, published analyses have demonstrated that media and communication scholarship suffers from a lack of replication studies, often due to presumptions about the lack of reward or incentive for conducting this work—such as perceived difficulties securing support for and/or publishing these studies. This commentary will reflect on and reinforce arguments for the intentional and important role of replication studies in media and communication scholarship. The essay reflects on replication as a key to post-positivist approaches, and then highlights recent developments that center replication work as key to scientific progression.","PeriodicalId":507746,"journal":{"name":"Media and Communication","volume":" 15","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140209943","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article examines how foreign policy branding is legitimated as a response to human rights crises. Drawing on legitimation theory (van Leeuwen, 2007), this study takes a discourse perspective with a focus on the enactment of foreign policy in communication and argues that legitimacy is the foundation for constructing a convincing and credible image of a country and its foreign policy. Building on the example of Sweden’s feminist foreign policy and an analysis of relevant policy documents, three themes were formulated. These illustrate that Sweden’s feminist foreign policy branding was legitimated by framing the policy as a form of “good” activism, creating a knowledge brand of the policy, and aligning the policy branding with established discourses of solidarity. Thus, the study suggests that a branding logic imposed by the attention economy leads foreign policy communication to focus on constructing “sellability” of foreign policy, legitimating it in ways that make it relatable to wider publics. This article contributes to foreign policy communication research through the conceptual development of foreign policy branding.
{"title":"Legitimating Policy Branding: Constructing “Sellability” of Sweden’s Feminist Foreign Policy","authors":"Isabelle Karlsson","doi":"10.17645/mac.7772","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.7772","url":null,"abstract":"This article examines how foreign policy branding is legitimated as a response to human rights crises. Drawing on legitimation theory (van Leeuwen, 2007), this study takes a discourse perspective with a focus on the enactment of foreign policy in communication and argues that legitimacy is the foundation for constructing a convincing and credible image of a country and its foreign policy. Building on the example of Sweden’s feminist foreign policy and an analysis of relevant policy documents, three themes were formulated. These illustrate that Sweden’s feminist foreign policy branding was legitimated by framing the policy as a form of “good” activism, creating a knowledge brand of the policy, and aligning the policy branding with established discourses of solidarity. Thus, the study suggests that a branding logic imposed by the attention economy leads foreign policy communication to focus on constructing “sellability” of foreign policy, legitimating it in ways that make it relatable to wider publics. This article contributes to foreign policy communication research through the conceptual development of foreign policy branding.","PeriodicalId":507746,"journal":{"name":"Media and Communication","volume":" 723","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140382885","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Migrant populations have been consistently more vulnerable than others, with their vulnerability being exacerbated in crises such as the Covid-19 pandemic. In the meantime, in their effort to “flatten the curve,” governments have been adopting policies that have significantly impacted migration in various ways. The effect of these policies has found migrants suffering disproportionately from the social and economic consequences of the pandemic crisis. Mobility restrictions have stranded them in the host countries, often without decent housing conditions, exacerbating xenophobic and discriminatory treatment of migrants. The study focuses on the case of Portugal and, more specifically, aims to provide a contextual feature of historical discussions of migration in Portugal and explore the perceptions and branding of migration policies in a crisis environment during the Covid-19 pandemic through the framing lens. Using empirical evidence from a frame analysis of parliamentary debates, the article investigates how immigration policies are branded and framed within Portugal, while it also evaluates the role of branding in migration policy-making, particularly in crisis scenarios. Overall, the article underscores the importance of branding in shaping migration policies, emphasising its significance in policy making.
{"title":"Shaping and Branding Migration Policy: A Retrospective Analysis of Portugal’s Contemporary Model","authors":"Vasiliki Tsagkroni","doi":"10.17645/mac.7912","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.7912","url":null,"abstract":"Migrant populations have been consistently more vulnerable than others, with their vulnerability being exacerbated in crises such as the Covid-19 pandemic. In the meantime, in their effort to “flatten the curve,” governments have been adopting policies that have significantly impacted migration in various ways. The effect of these policies has found migrants suffering disproportionately from the social and economic consequences of the pandemic crisis. Mobility restrictions have stranded them in the host countries, often without decent housing conditions, exacerbating xenophobic and discriminatory treatment of migrants. The study focuses on the case of Portugal and, more specifically, aims to provide a contextual feature of historical discussions of migration in Portugal and explore the perceptions and branding of migration policies in a crisis environment during the Covid-19 pandemic through the framing lens. Using empirical evidence from a frame analysis of parliamentary debates, the article investigates how immigration policies are branded and framed within Portugal, while it also evaluates the role of branding in migration policy-making, particularly in crisis scenarios. Overall, the article underscores the importance of branding in shaping migration policies, emphasising its significance in policy making.","PeriodicalId":507746,"journal":{"name":"Media and Communication","volume":"221 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140222906","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article critically examines the communicative and policy-framing response of Australia’s Victorian government to the state’s growing crisis of far-right extremism. Through a critical discourse analysis of the Victorian Andrews and Allan Labor governments’ political communication from 2021 to 2023, we explain how the government discursively responded to the rise of far-right extremism. We found the Andrews and Allan governments employed a range of communicative, discursive, and legitimisation strategies to both legitimise the government’s policy to ban Nazi symbols and gestures and to (re)establish Victoria’s reputation as an inclusive and multicultural liberal democracy. The findings of this article broaden our empirical understanding of the central role of political and crisis communication in responding to extremism and may provide a template for other governments to respond to the global crisis of far-right extremism.
{"title":"“Nazis Aren’t Welcome Here”: Selling Democracy in the Age of Far-Right Extremism","authors":"Kurt Sengul, J. McSwiney","doi":"10.17645/mac.7853","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.7853","url":null,"abstract":"This article critically examines the communicative and policy-framing response of Australia’s Victorian government to the state’s growing crisis of far-right extremism. Through a critical discourse analysis of the Victorian Andrews and Allan Labor governments’ political communication from 2021 to 2023, we explain how the government discursively responded to the rise of far-right extremism. We found the Andrews and Allan governments employed a range of communicative, discursive, and legitimisation strategies to both legitimise the government’s policy to ban Nazi symbols and gestures and to (re)establish Victoria’s reputation as an inclusive and multicultural liberal democracy. The findings of this article broaden our empirical understanding of the central role of political and crisis communication in responding to extremism and may provide a template for other governments to respond to the global crisis of far-right extremism.","PeriodicalId":507746,"journal":{"name":"Media and Communication","volume":" 27","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140221871","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Based on the comparative analysis of the three Western media system models distinguished by Daniel Hallin and Paolo Mancini (2004), this article revisits their thesis of a tendency towards the convergence of the Mediterranean model and the Liberal model—in terms of the weakening of links between media institutions and the political sphere—two decades after it was first posited. By studying the degree and nature of state intervention in the media systems of Spain, France, and Portugal in the 21st century, the aim is to ascertain whether, within a context of growing political polarisation and shrinking journalistic industry income, the distinctive characteristics of the role of the state in the Mediterranean model remain the same or have changed—and in what sense. The contextualised analysis of Spanish, French, and Portuguese policies relating to public service media, independent audiovisual media regulatory bodies, media subsidies, and state advertising on the one hand allows us to question whether state intervention in Mediterranean media systems has weakened, thereby reaffirming the thesis of the importance of nation-states in media governance and the relevance of the comparative study of national media systems in the era of digital globalisation. And, on the other hand, it enables continuities, discontinuities, and differences between the three countries to be identified in relation to the logic of clientelism that Hallin and Mancini observed in their media policies in 2004, as well as some initial elements for their interpretation to be noted.
{"title":"The Evolution of Government Intervention in the Mediterranean Media System: Spain, France, and Portugal","authors":"Ana Fernández-Viso, Isabel Fernández-Alonso","doi":"10.17645/mac.7738","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.7738","url":null,"abstract":"Based on the comparative analysis of the three Western media system models distinguished by Daniel Hallin and Paolo Mancini (2004), this article revisits their thesis of a tendency towards the convergence of the Mediterranean model and the Liberal model—in terms of the weakening of links between media institutions and the political sphere—two decades after it was first posited. By studying the degree and nature of state intervention in the media systems of Spain, France, and Portugal in the 21st century, the aim is to ascertain whether, within a context of growing political polarisation and shrinking journalistic industry income, the distinctive characteristics of the role of the state in the Mediterranean model remain the same or have changed—and in what sense. The contextualised analysis of Spanish, French, and Portuguese policies relating to public service media, independent audiovisual media regulatory bodies, media subsidies, and state advertising on the one hand allows us to question whether state intervention in Mediterranean media systems has weakened, thereby reaffirming the thesis of the importance of nation-states in media governance and the relevance of the comparative study of national media systems in the era of digital globalisation. And, on the other hand, it enables continuities, discontinuities, and differences between the three countries to be identified in relation to the logic of clientelism that Hallin and Mancini observed in their media policies in 2004, as well as some initial elements for their interpretation to be noted.","PeriodicalId":507746,"journal":{"name":"Media and Communication","volume":" 9","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140222239","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article endeavors to delve into the recent transformation of the Romanian media landscape, aiming to offer a nuanced comprehension of the cultural and political dynamics that have influenced journalistic practices. The Romanian media environment has undergone swift changes, transitioning from a monolithic structure to one increasingly driven by commercial interests, all while navigating economic and political pressures. The shift toward a free-market framework has not only reshaped the social and political fabric but has also significantly impacted the media sector. This article posits that the Romanian media landscape is shaped by the interplay of cultural, economic, and political forces, evident in journalistic outputs across both traditional and digital platforms. This assertion aligns with Hallin and Mancini’s (2004) notion of parallelism between journalism and politics. Moreover, it extends this perspective to encompass cultural influences and the evolving media landscape resulting from shifts in the media market, changing consumption patterns, and the proliferation of digital media. Key indicators such as professional standards, editorial autonomy, transparency, financial sustainability, political influence, and media regulations are critically examined within the unique context of Romania, in which political interference and growing reliance on advertising revenue often curtail editorial independence. In conclusion, the article reflects on the current state of the Romanian media system and the manifold challenges it confronts amidst the changing dynamics of the media landscape.
{"title":"The Romanian Media System: Dynamics, Challenges, and Implications for Democracy","authors":"Madalina Botan","doi":"10.17645/mac.7847","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.7847","url":null,"abstract":"This article endeavors to delve into the recent transformation of the Romanian media landscape, aiming to offer a nuanced comprehension of the cultural and political dynamics that have influenced journalistic practices. The Romanian media environment has undergone swift changes, transitioning from a monolithic structure to one increasingly driven by commercial interests, all while navigating economic and political pressures. The shift toward a free-market framework has not only reshaped the social and political fabric but has also significantly impacted the media sector. This article posits that the Romanian media landscape is shaped by the interplay of cultural, economic, and political forces, evident in journalistic outputs across both traditional and digital platforms. This assertion aligns with Hallin and Mancini’s (2004) notion of parallelism between journalism and politics. Moreover, it extends this perspective to encompass cultural influences and the evolving media landscape resulting from shifts in the media market, changing consumption patterns, and the proliferation of digital media. Key indicators such as professional standards, editorial autonomy, transparency, financial sustainability, political influence, and media regulations are critically examined within the unique context of Romania, in which political interference and growing reliance on advertising revenue often curtail editorial independence. In conclusion, the article reflects on the current state of the Romanian media system and the manifold challenges it confronts amidst the changing dynamics of the media landscape.","PeriodicalId":507746,"journal":{"name":"Media and Communication","volume":"13 11","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140230449","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Tania Fernández-Lombao, O. Blasco-Blasco, Francisco Campos Freire
The open conclusions with which Hallin and Mancini (2004, 2011) approached their comparative study of Western media systems, initiated in 1998, retain their empirical, revisionist, and prospective value—even from critical perspectives—after a quarter of a century of profound historical, social, and technological changes. The names given to the three traditional media models in those authors’ first publication are used in this article to compare the evolution of funding, audience shares, governance, structure, and political intervention in European countries’ public service media on the one hand, and to contrast the operational hypothesis that politicisation persists and is increasing in European public service media in their adaptation to the digital society, on the other hand. Based on the variables from Hallin and Mancini’s empirical model, five crucial questions about the evolution of public service media in the EU are addressed: intervention and development of regulation by states and by the European Commission in the area of shared powers; a comparative analysis of the funding systems and consumer audiences of each European country’s public service media; the changes in the governance and management structures of said public service media; the variation in the professional culture and the rational-legal authority of their organisations; and the evolution and legitimation of public service media’s public value in the internet society, as well as the persistence or mutability of the national media systems’ fit within Hallin and Mancini’s three original models.
哈林和曼奇尼（Hallin and Mancini，2004, 2011）于 1998 年开始对西方媒体系统进行比较研究，在经历了四分之一世纪的深刻历史、社会和技术变革之后，他们得出的开放性结论仍然具有实证、修正和前瞻性价值，甚至从批判的角度来看也是如此。本文采用作者在第一部著作中为三种传统媒体模式所起的名称，一方面比较欧洲国家公共服务媒体在资金、受众份额、治理、结构和政治干预方面的演变，另一方面对比欧洲公共服务媒体在适应数字社会过程中政治化持续存在且不断增加的操作假设。根据哈林和曼奇尼的实证模型中的变量，探讨了有关欧盟公共服务媒体演变的五个关键问题：各国和欧盟委员会在共享权力领域的监管干预和发展；对欧洲各国公共服务媒体的筹资系统和消费者受众的比较分析；上述公共服务媒体的治理和管理结构的变化；其组织的专业文化和理性-法律权威的变化；公共服务媒体的公共价值在互联网社会中的演变和合法化，以及各国媒体系统在 Hallin 和 Mancini 的三个原始模型中的适应性的持续性或变异性。
{"title":"Politicisation Persists and Is Increasing in European Public Service Media in the Digital Society","authors":"Tania Fernández-Lombao, O. Blasco-Blasco, Francisco Campos Freire","doi":"10.17645/mac.7759","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.7759","url":null,"abstract":"The open conclusions with which Hallin and Mancini (2004, 2011) approached their comparative study of Western media systems, initiated in 1998, retain their empirical, revisionist, and prospective value—even from critical perspectives—after a quarter of a century of profound historical, social, and technological changes. The names given to the three traditional media models in those authors’ first publication are used in this article to compare the evolution of funding, audience shares, governance, structure, and political intervention in European countries’ public service media on the one hand, and to contrast the operational hypothesis that politicisation persists and is increasing in European public service media in their adaptation to the digital society, on the other hand. Based on the variables from Hallin and Mancini’s empirical model, five crucial questions about the evolution of public service media in the EU are addressed: intervention and development of regulation by states and by the European Commission in the area of shared powers; a comparative analysis of the funding systems and consumer audiences of each European country’s public service media; the changes in the governance and management structures of said public service media; the variation in the professional culture and the rational-legal authority of their organisations; and the evolution and legitimation of public service media’s public value in the internet society, as well as the persistence or mutability of the national media systems’ fit within Hallin and Mancini’s three original models.","PeriodicalId":507746,"journal":{"name":"Media and Communication","volume":" 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140389422","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Over 3,000 articles from 2012–2022 in Spanish and English across the US, Mexico, Guatemala, Nicaragua, El Salvador, and Honduras were manually coded to better understand how refugees in crisis were framed in both home and destination countries. This study uses a detailed frame analysis and a broad transnational network analysis to highlight each refugee attribute on the media agenda that then informs policy across nations. While there is wide variation in the immigration policies of the countries sampled, there was nearly uniform negative framing and clustering of identical negative attributes across all countries sampled. This negative transnational homogenization of news content problematises the idea of unique journalism norms and may have profound “real world” consequences that can further stigmatize refugees throughout the Americas. This research also found that the valence of content became more negative and emotive over time. This suggests that the debate around immigration will continue and even escalate as a battleground of politics and culture—and that refugees may be portrayed even more negatively across media in the future. Given this increasing negativity and emotionality in coverage, societies may see more nationalistic—and xenophobic—immigration policies throughout the Americas and a less empathetic focus on the human rights of refugees.
{"title":"A Transnational Network Analysis of Refugees in Crisis","authors":"L. Kenix, Eliot Gibbins","doi":"10.17645/mac.7680","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.7680","url":null,"abstract":"Over 3,000 articles from 2012–2022 in Spanish and English across the US, Mexico, Guatemala, Nicaragua, El Salvador, and Honduras were manually coded to better understand how refugees in crisis were framed in both home and destination countries. This study uses a detailed frame analysis and a broad transnational network analysis to highlight each refugee attribute on the media agenda that then informs policy across nations. While there is wide variation in the immigration policies of the countries sampled, there was nearly uniform negative framing and clustering of identical negative attributes across all countries sampled. This negative transnational homogenization of news content problematises the idea of unique journalism norms and may have profound “real world” consequences that can further stigmatize refugees throughout the Americas. This research also found that the valence of content became more negative and emotive over time. This suggests that the debate around immigration will continue and even escalate as a battleground of politics and culture—and that refugees may be portrayed even more negatively across media in the future. Given this increasing negativity and emotionality in coverage, societies may see more nationalistic—and xenophobic—immigration policies throughout the Americas and a less empathetic focus on the human rights of refugees.","PeriodicalId":507746,"journal":{"name":"Media and Communication","volume":"40 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140234445","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Increasing awareness of the “replication crisis” has prompted discussion about replicability and reproducibility in social and behavioral science research, including in communication. As with other fields, communication has seen discussion about concerns with the interpretation of existing research. One response has been the piecemeal adoption of “open science” practices in communication to reduce selectivity in analysis, reporting, and publication of research. Calls for further adoption of such practices have, in turn, been met with criticisms and concerns about the negative consequences of their adoption. Amidst disparate perspectives regarding solutions to replicability and reproducibility issues in communication science, difficulties building consensus and caution about negative outcomes are understandable, but they also present the risk of a status quo bias that could stall the improvement of the replicability and reproducibility of communication research. The urgency of the replication crisis for communication and the cost of inaction are presented here along three exemplifying dimensions perhaps of particular importance in communication research: (a) responsibility to the public, (b) stewardship of resources, and (c) membership in a community of scholars. While debate over solutions will continue, we would do well to keep in mind that problems with replicability and reproducibility in communication research are indeed a crisis needing immediate attention.
{"title":"Remembering Reasons for Reform: A More Replicable and Reproducible Communication Literature Without the Rancor","authors":"James D. Ivory","doi":"10.17645/mac.7852","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.7852","url":null,"abstract":"Increasing awareness of the “replication crisis” has prompted discussion about replicability and reproducibility in social and behavioral science research, including in communication. As with other fields, communication has seen discussion about concerns with the interpretation of existing research. One response has been the piecemeal adoption of “open science” practices in communication to reduce selectivity in analysis, reporting, and publication of research. Calls for further adoption of such practices have, in turn, been met with criticisms and concerns about the negative consequences of their adoption. Amidst disparate perspectives regarding solutions to replicability and reproducibility issues in communication science, difficulties building consensus and caution about negative outcomes are understandable, but they also present the risk of a status quo bias that could stall the improvement of the replicability and reproducibility of communication research. The urgency of the replication crisis for communication and the cost of inaction are presented here along three exemplifying dimensions perhaps of particular importance in communication research: (a) responsibility to the public, (b) stewardship of resources, and (c) membership in a community of scholars. While debate over solutions will continue, we would do well to keep in mind that problems with replicability and reproducibility in communication research are indeed a crisis needing immediate attention.","PeriodicalId":507746,"journal":{"name":"Media and Communication","volume":"5 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140250214","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
When Hallin and Mancini (2004) produced their watershed three models theory, South Africa was a new democracy barely a decade old. Even then, along with other countries of the Global South, the experience of a young democracy posed certain critical challenges to Hallin and Mancini’s understanding of the way that media and politics interrelate. Two decades later, South Africa has continued to change. There has been increased diversity in media ownership, rapid growth in community and social media, digital disruption, and significant challenges to media freedom. How does the three models theory stack up now? This article reviews scholarly critiques of Hallin and Mancini’s model, including their follow-up work, Comparing Media Systems Beyond the Western World (2012), and assesses to what extent the three models is still a valid approach to understanding the connection between media and politics in the Global South. The article concludes by evaluating Hadland’s (2012) Africanisation of the model in light of the complex postcolonial trajectories of South Africa, suggesting that this, along with Hallin et al.’s (2021) expanded hybridisation model, still offers a better set of variables with which to understand how the media and political systems intertwine in the postcolony.
{"title":"South African Media and Politics: Is the Three Models Approach Still Valid After Two Decades?","authors":"Bernadine Jones, A. Hadland","doi":"10.17645/mac.7723","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.7723","url":null,"abstract":"When Hallin and Mancini (2004) produced their watershed three models theory, South Africa was a new democracy barely a decade old. Even then, along with other countries of the Global South, the experience of a young democracy posed certain critical challenges to Hallin and Mancini’s understanding of the way that media and politics interrelate. Two decades later, South Africa has continued to change. There has been increased diversity in media ownership, rapid growth in community and social media, digital disruption, and significant challenges to media freedom. How does the three models theory stack up now? This article reviews scholarly critiques of Hallin and Mancini’s model, including their follow-up work, Comparing Media Systems Beyond the Western World (2012), and assesses to what extent the three models is still a valid approach to understanding the connection between media and politics in the Global South. The article concludes by evaluating Hadland’s (2012) Africanisation of the model in light of the complex postcolonial trajectories of South Africa, suggesting that this, along with Hallin et al.’s (2021) expanded hybridisation model, still offers a better set of variables with which to understand how the media and political systems intertwine in the postcolony.","PeriodicalId":507746,"journal":{"name":"Media and Communication","volume":"41 7‐8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140252255","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：